The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSWP272764 ��. Short PIat*(SHPL•# ) . REQUEST FOR PROJl.CT V Prelim Plat (PP# CAG#r ) To: Technical Services Date Afti/ 6 , oq9 WO# :)A From: Plan Review/Project Managcr Project Name (70 charactm max) Description of Project: ;\d o Circle Size of Waterline: 8" 10" 12" Circle One: New or Extension Circle Size Of SeWCrline: 8" 10" 12" Circle One: New or Extension Circle Size of Stormline: 12" 15" 18" 24" Circle One: New or Extension Address or Street Name(s) G= I ( `;, c t ; S >, ;_ V c , ;:` . l e p DvI r/Contractor/awn Cnslt:;: (70 characters max) Check each discipline involved in Project Ltr Drwg #of sheets per discipline ❑ Trans-StoRn l_ �_�, r << _ << .f::�'ye r ;5rn ❑ ❑ 1 C 3 C 2- (Road way/Drainagc) (Off sire improvuncnu)(inelude basin name) (include TESC shceu) ❑ Transportation (Signalization,Chanaclization Lighting) ❑ ❑ ❑ Wastewater u r i<;, - , , O Cl G t C 3 Sanitary Sewer Main(include basin name) t %� ❑ Water (Main •Valves,Hydrants) ❑ El j C J (Include composite 6c Horizontal Ccr!Shccu) ❑ Suface Water �, ❑ _� Improvements (CIP ONLY)(includc basin namc) TS Use Oniy C% -1(p� WiR- a7 - c3Rv =-- 1 1 A 141- ilitNI. , 1 Krazan & ASSOCIATES, INC. ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING•ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING&INSPECTION ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RENTON INN 217-219 SUNSET BOULEVARD NORTH ' RENTON, WASHINGTON ' PROJECT No. 062-98261 NOVEMBER 25, 1998 Prepared for: ' SUE TSENG 219 SUNSET BOULEVARD NORTH RENTON,WASHINGTON 98055 t ' Prepared by: ' KRAZAN&ASSOCIATES,INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION 25418 74T"AVENUE SOUTH KENT,WASHINGTON 98032 ' (253) 854-1330 CITY OF RENTON Nov ==Krazan & ASSOCIATES , INC . ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION November 25, 1998 KA Project No. 062-98261 Ms. Sue Tseng 219 Sunset Boulevard North tRenton, Washington 98055 RE: Proposed Renton Inn 219-217 Sunset Boulevard North Renton,Washington tDear Ms. Tseng In accordance with your request, we have completed a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the referenced site. 1 The results of our investigation are presented in the attached report. If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance,please do not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN AND ASSOCIATES,INC. Dean Alexander Principal Engineer RPE No. 00030508 EXAA DA:kcp pF NAS a f I A U7JJJL�` � �f 'In ��G-ST �C� '310 AL E�ZCs EXPIRES. 1 1 Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 25418 74"Avenue South*Kent, Washington 98032•(253)854-1330•Fax:(253)854-1757 f ' era. Sam � XaZan & ASSOCIATES , INC . ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................I PURPOSEAND SCOPE ..............................................................................................................I PROPOSEDCONSTRUCTION.....................................................................................................2 SITE LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................2 GEOLOGICSETTING................................................................................................................2 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS .............................................................................3 ' SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .........................................................................3 GROUNDWATER......................................................................................................................3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................4 Administrative Summary.............................................. .4 Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction..............................................................................4 SitePreparation........................................................................................................................5 EngineeredFill.........................................................................................................................6 Drainage and Landscaping........................................................ .6 UtilityTrench Backfill................................................................................................................6 Foundations.............................................................................................................................7 Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork..................................................................................................8 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls......................................................................................8 Pavement Design ...................................................................................... ...............8 ................. Compacted Material Acceptance....................................................... ..9 Testingand Inspection.................................................................. ........................................... 10 LIMITATIONS........................................................................................................................ 10 tVICINITY MAP..............................................................................................................................................12 SITEPLAN......................................................................................................................................................13 LOGS OF BORINGS (1 through 5)............................................................................................. Appendix A ' GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS...................................................................... Appendix B GENERAL PAVING SPECIFICATIONS.................................................................................. Appendix C Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 25418 74'Avenue South•Kent, Washington 98032•(253)854-1330•Fax:(253)854-1757 06298261 Kraz an & ASSOCIATES , INC . 1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION 1 November 25, 1998 KA Project No. 062-98261 ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RENTON INN 217-219 SUNSET BOULEVARD NORTH RENTON,WASHINGTON ' INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the proposed Renton Inn to ' be located at 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North in Renton, Washington. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site preparation, Engineered Fill, utility trench backfill, drainage and landscaping, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior flatwork, retaining walls, and pavement. A site plan showing the approximate test boring locations is presented following the text of this report. A ' description of the field investigation, boring logs, and the boring log legend are presented in Appendix A. Appendix A contains a description of laboratory testing phase of this study; along with laboratory test ' results. Appendices B and C contain guides to earthwork and pavement specifications. When conflicts in the text of the report occur with the general specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have precedence. tPURPOSE AND SCOPE This investigation was conducted to evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions at the site, to make geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design of specific construction elements, and to provide criteria for site preparation and Engineered Fill construction. Our scope of services was outlined as follows: • A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff to evaluate the surface conditions at the project site. ' • A field investigation consisting of drilling 5 borings to depths ranging from 9 to 39 feet, for evaluation of the subsurface conditions at the project site. ' • Performing laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the test borings to evaluate the physical and index properties of the subsurface soils. 1 en Offices Serving The Western United States 25418 74"Avenue South•Kent, Washington 98032•(253)854-1330•Fax:(253)854-1757 06298261 ' KA No. 062-98261 Page No. 2 1 • Evaluation of the data obtained from the investigation and an engineering analysis to provide recommendations for use in the project design and preparation of construction specifications. • Preparation of this report summarizing the results, conclusions,recommendations and findings of our investigation. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We were provided a preliminary site plan prepared by Lee and Associates dated October 30, 1998. This plan indicates that the proposed development will include the construction of a 3-story, 34-room hotel. The 1 building will cover an area of approximately 4,850 square feet. The building will be a wood-frame structure utilizing a concrete slab-on-grade. The associated parking and landscaping are also planned. The total design loads are 90 psf for dead load and 125 psf for live load. In the event these structural or grading details are inconsistent with the final design criteria, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable. SITE LOCATION AND SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is located at 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North in Renton, Washington. The site consists of 2 rectangular parcels encompassing an area of approximately 0.46 acres. The site is bounded by sidewalks and Sunset Boulevard North to the east, by developed commercial property to the north and south, and railroad track to the west. The site is currently occupied by a teriyaki restaurant, a Rubber Duck Office store, a residential structure with basement, and three single-family residential structures. An asphaltic concrete driveway enters the site near the southeast corner and extends towards the central portion of the site serving all four residences. The remainder of the site is covered with grass and scattered ornamental landscaping. Site is relatively level with no major changes in grade GEOLOGIC SETTING ' The subject site lies within the central Puget Lowland. The lowland is part of a regional north-south trending trough that extends from southwestern British Columbia to near Eugene, Oregon. North of Olympia Washington, this lowland is glacially carved, with a depositional and erosional history including at least four separate glacial advance/retreats. The Puget Lowland is bounded on the west by the Olympic Mountains and on the east by the Cascade Range. The lowland is filled with glacial and nonglacial sediments consisting of ' interbedded gravel, sand, silt,till, and peat lenses. The soils in the vicinity of the subject property were formed as alluvium in river valleys. These glacially derived sediments were deposited following the recession of the Vashon Glacier, over 13,500 years ago. The advance of the Vashon Glacier deepened and widened valleys trending north-south. Thick bodies of sand, 1 gravel, and glacial till were deposited over the area. With the retreat of the glacier, ice-contact stratified drift was deposited over much of the area, followed by a period of alluvial valley filling by the Cedar River. As the valley continued to fill, river meandering formed oxbow lakes in which peat deposits developed. In Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 06298261 KA No. 062-98261 Page No. 3 ' recent ears, agricultural use of the valley has been replaced b commercial use. With the advent of Y � Y P Y commercial development, surface grades in the vicinity were raised by placement of several feet of fill material. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Subsurface soils conditions explored by drilling 5 borings to depths ranging from approximately 9 to 39 feet below existing site grade using a truck-mounted drill rig. The approximate boring locations are shown on the site map. The soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of natural moisture, and gradation of the materials encountered. Details of the laboratory test program and the results of laboratory test are summarized in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final boring logs in Appendix A. SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Based on our findings, the subsurface conditions encountered appear typical of those found in this geologic region of the site. In general, the pavement section consisted of approximately 2 inches of asphaltic concrete pavement. In areas where asphaltic concrete pavement was not present, the upper soils consisted of 6 to 12 ' inches of very loose silty sand. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated. ' Approximately 2 to 6'/2 feet of silty sand fill was encountered at the site. Testing and inspection reports performed on the fill placement within the project site were not available as of this report date. Limited testing was performed on the fill soils at the time of our investigation. The limited testing indicates the fill material was loosely placed and not properly compacted. Beneath the loose to very loose surface soils and the fill material, 7%2 to 10 feet of very loose to very dense sand or gravelly sand was encountered. Field and laboratory tests suggest that these soils are moderately strong and slightly compressible. Penetration resistance ranged from 3 to 54 blows per foot. Dry densities ranged from 4 to 35 pcf. Below 9 to 17'/2 feet, predominantly sandy gravelly and gravelly sand were encountered. These soils had similar strength characteristics as the upper soils and extended to the termination depth of our borings. tFor additional information about the soils encountered, please refer to the logs of borings in Appendix A. GROUNDWATER Test boring locations were checked for the presence of groundwater during and immediately following the ' drilling operations. Free groundwater was encountered at 19'/2 below surface grade. Krazan& Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States ' 06298261 KA No. 062-98261 Page No.4 It should be recognized that water table elevations may fluctuate with time being dependent upon seasonal b'n Y � g P P precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions as well as other factors. Therefore, water level observations at the time of the field investigation may vary from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ' Based on the findings of our field and laboratory investigations, along with previous Geotechnical experience in the project area, the following is a summary of our evaluations, conclusions and recommendations. Administrative Summary In brief, the subject site and soil conditions, with the exception of the very loose to loose fill soils and ' existing development, appear to be conducive to the development of the project. Approximately 2 to 7 feet of very loose to silty sand fill was encountered within the proposed building areas. Field and laboratory tests suggest that the fill material has been loosely placed and not properly compacted. It is therefore recommended that the fill material be removed and/or recompacted. The fill soils will be suitable for reuse as nonexpansive Engineered Fill provided that it is cleansed of excessive organics and debris. The majority of the site is covered with grass and ornamental landscaping and the surface soils have a loose consistency. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated. Accordingly, it is recommended that the surface soils be recompacted. This compaction effort should stabilize the surface soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during our field 1 investigation. Presently, the site is occupied by existing structures with concrete foundations and retaining walls. Possible buried structures, such as utility lines, may be located within these areas. Any buried structures encountered should be properly removed and backfilled. Disturbed areas caused by demolition activities should be recompacted. ' Sandy soil conditions were encountered throughout the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these soils. After completion of the recommended site preparation, the site should be suitable for shallow footing support. The proposed structure footings may be designed utilizing an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 1 psf, for dead-plus-live loads. Footings should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches. Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction Based on our findings and historical records, it is not anticipated that groundwater will rise within the zone of structural influence or affect the construction of foundations and pavements for the project. However, if ' earthwork is performed during or soon after periods of precipitation, the subgrade soils may become saturated, pump, or not respond to densification techniques. Typical remedial measures include discing and aerating the soil during dry weather; mixing the soil with dryer materials; removing and replacing the soil Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States ' 06298261 ' KA No. 062-98261 Page No. 5 ' with an approved fill material; or mixing the soil with an approved lime or cement product. Our firm should PP be consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to observe the unstable subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations. ' Site Preparation General site clearing should include removal of vegetation, existing utilities, structures including foundations, basement walls and floors, existing stockpiled soil, trees and associated root systems, rubble, rubbish and any loose and/or saturated materials. Site stripping should extend to a minimum depth of two to four inches, or until all organics in excess of 3 percent by volume are removed. Deeper stripping may be required in localized areas. These materials will not be suitable for use as Engineered Fill. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non-structural areas. Approximately 2 to 7 feet of loosely placed fill is located within building areas. This fill material has only been loosely placed and not properly compacted. Additionally, the fill material contained excessive fragments of asphaltic concrete and debris. Accordingly, it is recommended that this fill material be removed within building and exterior flatwork areas so that the surface soils can be properly prepared. The fill material will be suitable for reuse as non-expansive Engineered Fill, provided it is cleansed of excessive organics and debris. ' Presently, a portion of the site is occupied by existing residence structures with concrete foundations and retaining walls. It is suspected that demolition activities at the existing structures will disturb the upper soils. 1 After demolition activities, it is recommended that all disturbed soils be excavated to firm native ground, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. In addition, at a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches within building pad, exterior flatwork, and pavement areas be excavated/scarified, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Within the proposed pavement areas, it is recommended that the fill material be removed and/or recompacted. The fill materials should be compacted to near optimum moisture to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. As an alternative, the owner may elect not to recompact the existing fill within paved areas. However, the owner should be aware that the paved areas may settle, which may require annual maintenance. At a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 12 ' inches of subgrade soil be moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. ' The upper soils, during wet winter months, become very moist due to the absorption characteristics of the soil. Earthwork operations performed during winter months may encounter very moist unstable soils, which may require removal to grade a stable building foundation. Project site winterization consisting of placement of aggregate base and protecting exposed soils during the construction phase should be performed. Existing structures are located at the site. Any buried structures encountered during construction should be properly removed and backfilled. Excavations, depressions, or soft and pliant areas extending below planned finish subgrade level should be cleaned to firm undisturbed soil, and backfilled with Engineered Fill. In general, any septic tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or similar structures should be entirely removed. Concrete Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States ' 06298261 ' KA No. 062-98261 Page No. 6 ' footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed v g q p p pos d footing elevations or as recommended by the Soils Engineer. Any other buried structures should be removed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer. Resulting excavations should be backfilled with Engineered Fill. A representative of our firm should be present during all site clearing and grading operations to test and observe earthwork construction. This testing and observation is an integral part of our service as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction of the material and the stability of the material. The Soils Engineer may reject any material that does not meet compaction and stability requirements. Further recommendations of this report are predicated upon the assumption that earthwork construction will conform to recommendations set forth in this section and the Engineered Fill section. ' Engineered Fill The organic-free on-site soils are predominantly silty sand, sand, gravelly sand, and sandy gravel. These soils will be suitable for reuse as non-expansive Engineered Fill The on-site fill material is predominantly silty sand. These will be suitable for reuse as non-expansive Engineered Fill provided it is cleansed of excessive organics and/or debris. Imported Fill material should be predominantly non-expansive granular material with a plasticity index less than 10 and a UBC Expansion Index less than 15. Imported Fill should be free from rocks and lumps greater than 4 inches in diameter. All Import Fill material should be submitted for approval to the Soils Engineer at ' least 48 hours prior to delivery to the site. Fill soils should be placed in lifts approximately 6 inches thick, moisture-conditioned as necessary and compacted to 95 percent of the maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable. Drainage and Landsca- ' The ground surface should slope away from building pad and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or other surface drainage devices. It is recommended that adjacent exterior grades be sloped a minimum of 2 percent for a minimum distance of 5 feet away from structures. Subgrade soils in pavement areas should be ' sloped a minimum of 1 percent and drainage gradients maintained to carry all surface water to collection facilities and off site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trenches should be excavated according to accepted engineering practice following OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) standards by a contractor experienced in such work. The responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by the contractor. Traffic and vibration ' adjacent to trench walls should be minimized and cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side slopes should be avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater flow into open excavations could be experienced, especially during or shortly following periods of precipitation. Krazan&Associates,Inc. ' Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 06298261 ' KA No. 062-98261 Page No. 7 Sand soil conditions were encountered throughout the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to Y g Y cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils. Utility trench backfill placed in or adjacent to buildings and exterior slabs should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). The upper two feet of the utility trench backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). ' Pipe bedding should be in accordance with pipe manufacturer's recommendations. The contractor is responsible for removing all water sensitive soils from the trench regardless of the backfill location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction. ' Foundations The proposed structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on undisturbed native soil ' or on Engineered Fill or drilled piers or augercast piling. Spread and continuous footings can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures: Load Allowable Loading Dead Load Only 1,880 psf Dead-Plus-Live Load 2,500 psf Total Load, including wind or seismic 3,325 psf loads Exterior footings should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Interior footings should have a minimum depth of 12 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Footings should have a minimum width 1 of 12 inches regardless of load. The total settlement is not expected to exceed '/2 inch. Differential settlement, along a 20-foot exterior wall footing, or between adjoining column footings, should be less than inch, producing an angular distortion of 0.002. Most of the settlement is expected to occur during construction, as the loads are applied. However, additional post-construction settlement may occur if the foundation soils are flooded or saturated. ' Providing the site is prepared as recommended in our report, seasonal rainfall, water run-off, or normal watering practice of trees and landscaping areas, around the proposed building, should not flood and/or saturate the footings, and consequently produce additional post-construction settlement. Resistance to lateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.40 acting 1 between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance for footings can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The frictional and passive resistance of the soil may be Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States ' 06298261 KA No.062-98261 Page No. 8 combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. A 1/3 increase in the above value ' may be used for short duration, wind or seismic loads. Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork ' Both wood floors and floor slab construction should be appropriate for this project. Slab-on-grade construction should have a moisture barrier incorporated into the floor slab design. Interior slab-on-grade ' should have at least 2 inches of clean free-draining concrete sand placed below the floor slab. The sand should conform to ASTM C33 requirements for fine aggregate. An impervious membrane (vapor barrier) should be placed under the 2 inches of sand. This system of 2 inches of sand and a vapor barrier should be ' underlain by an additional 2 inches of clean concrete sand to prevent capillary moisture rise. Prior to pouring concrete, the sand should be thoroughly consolidated. ' The exterior floors should be poured separately in order to act independently of the walls and foundation system. Exterior finish grades should be sloped a minimum of 1 to 1`/2 percent away from all interior slab areas to preclude ponding of water adjacent to the structures. All fills required to bring the building pads to ' grade should be Engineered Fills. Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls ' Walls retaining horizontal backfill and capable of deflecting a minimum of 0.1 percent of its height at the top may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 31 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls incapable of this deflection or are fully constrained walls against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at-rest pressure of 58 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Expansive soils should not be used for backfill against walls. The wedge of non-expansive backfill material should extend from the bottom of each retaining wall outward and upward at a slope of 2:1, horizontal to vertical, or flatter. The stated lateral earth pressures do not include the effects of hydrostatic water pressures generated by infiltrating surface water that may accumulate behind the retaining walls; or loads imposed by construction equipment, foundations or roadways. During grading and backfilling operations adjacent to any walls, heavy equipment should not be allowed to operate within a lateral distance of 5 feet from the wall, or within a lateral distance equal to the wall height, whichever is greater, to avoid developing excessive lateral pressures. Within this zone, only hand operated equipment ("whackers", vibratory plates, or pneumatic compactors) should be used to compact the backfill soils. Pavement Design The near surface subgrade soils generally consist of a silty sand or sand. The subgrade has an assumed R- value of 30. The following table shows the recommended pavement sections for light duty and heavy duty. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States 1 06298261 ' KA No. 062-98261 Page No. 9 ' ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT LIGHT DUTY ' Traffic Index Asphaltic Concrete Aggregate Base* Compacted Subgrade* ' 4.5 2.5" 5.5" 12.0" HEAVY DUTY Traffic Index Asphaltic Concrete Aggregate Base* Compacted Subgrade* ' 7.0 4.0" 9.5" 12.0" * 95%compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 I The following recommendations are for light-duty and heavy-duty Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections. PORTLAND CEMENT PAVEMENT LIGHT DUTY ' Traffic Index Portland Cement Aggregate Base* Compacted Concrete Subgrade* 4.5 5.0" -- 12.0" ' HEAVY DUTY Traffic Index Portland Cement Aggregate Base* Compacted Concrete Subgrade* 7.0 6.5" -- 12.0" * 95%compaction based on ASTMD1557 ' **Minimum compressive strength of 3000 psi Within the proposed pavement areas, it is recommended that the fill material be removed and/or recompacted. The fill materials should be compacted to near optimum moisture to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D 1557. As an alternative, the owner may elect not to recompact the existing fill within paved areas. However, the owner should be aware that the paved areas may settle, which may require annual maintenance. At a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 12 ' inches of subgrade soil be moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture and recompacted to a minimum of 95 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. ' Compacted Material Acceptance ' Compaction specifications are not the only criteria for acceptance of the site grading or other such activities. The compaction test is the most universally recognized test method for assessing the performance of the Grading Contractor. However, the numerical test results from the compaction test cannot be used to predict ' Krazan& Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States ' 06298261 ' KA No.062-98261 Page No. 10 the engineering performance of the compacted material. Therefore, the acceptance of compacted materials will also be dependent on the stability of that material. The Soils Engineer has the option of rejecting any compacted material regardless of the degree of compaction if that material is considered to be unstable or if future instability is suspected. A specific example of rejection of fill material passing the required percent ' compaction is a fill which has been compacted with an in-situ moisture content significantly less than optimum moisture. This type of dry fill (brittle fill) is susceptible to future settlement if it becomes saturated or flooded. ' Testing and Inspection ' A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc., should be present at the site during the earthwork activities to confirm that actual subsurface conditions are consistent with the exploratory field work. This activity is an integral part of our services as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. Krazan & Associates, Inc., will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. LIMITATIONS Soils Engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences improve. Although your site was analyzed using the most appropriate current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to improvements in the field of Soils Engineering, physical changes in the site either due to excavation or fill placement, new agency regulations or possible changes in the proposed structure after the time of completion of the soils report may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. In light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report without critical review. Although the time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that two years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of ' this report. ' Foundation and earthwork construction is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of ' the earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that supplemental ' recommendations can be made. The conclusions of this report are based on the information provided regarding the proposed construction. If ' the proposed construction is relocated or redesigned, the conclusions in this report may not be valid. The Soils Engineer should be notified of any changes so the recommendations can be reviewed and reevaluated. ' This report is a geotechnical engineering investigation with the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any environmental site assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater or atmosphere, or the ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States ' 06298261 ' KA No. 062-98261 Page No. 11 presence of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed are strictly for descriptive purposed and are not ' intended to convey engineering judgment regarding potential hazardous and/or toxic assessment. The geotechnical data presented herewith is based upon professional interpretation utilizing standard tengineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project. It is not warranted that such data and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical developments. We emphasize that ' this report is valid for this project as outlined above, and should not be used for any other site. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (253) 854-1330. Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN ASSOCIAT S,INC,i Richard Hyland ' Staff Engineer Dean Al( exa ' Principal Engineer RPE No. 30508 ' RH/DA:kcp p,LE9 04 W A3kI F�lSTV-'- ��SSIDNA L ECG` ' EXPIRES. 1 ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States ' 06298261 •`a\�� , x� '� \ �� ,� fir� ,�► 1� .. .../'' Em N FIGURE I-VICINITY A. ASSOCIATES, Location: Renton, Kent,WA 98032 Job No. : 062-98261 25418 74 Avenue South Client: Sue Tseng 1 . ': op ,NN -`.% Pt��J j 0 AAf5b AA qF� I" O A`�Z� n�Q E CA A A A 44.6 2 ' rrA BORING 4 PLO �eJO _ Nb4145'06•W 133.54' (° AV O �10 2 6 0 O FLOW L I \0 CO q AA�� W ` 0F\,AA� w BORING 3 OQp2 OF C z F F �° C�N�P (�N A 1— 133.54' \4 z W N64'45.06"W A 3.3.� 43.3 43.4 �°PA .`\ Line of proposed E NO building � % AA2 'ITA�� A� � A �F Cl) 43 PARGEL N�. BORING 5 �. a 3 LV Off. OOo. pNL BORING 1 172305 �107 1) Q Q yn BORING 2 3 _� i v � 000 pNL. O v 0� �0��N c.D��c� A S . A 7 Z 4 4 F wg A'S � ►-O �t � 00 HIGH ' N64'45'06 W 9 Approximate locations of borings drilled by Krazan & Associates ' Figure provided by Lee and Associates Dated 11/15/98). NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 2-SITE MAP KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 25418 74`h Avenue South Location: Renton,Washington Kent,WA 98032 Job No. : 062-98261 (253)854-1330 Client: Sue Tseng Date: 11-25-98 Appendix A ' Page A.1 ' APPENDIX A FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Field Investigation ' The field investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploratory program. Five exploratory borings were excavated. The boring locations are shown on the site plan. The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and, with supplementary laboratory test data, are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. ' Soil samples were obtained from the borings 2 'h-foot to 5-foot depth intervals by means of the Standard Penetration Test procedure (ASTM:D-1586). All samples were returned to our Kent laboratory for ' evaluation. Laboratory Investization ' The laboratory investigation was programmed to determine the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. Test results were used as criteria for determining the engineering suitability of the surface and subsurface materials encountered. ' In-situ moisture content, dry density, and direct sieve analysis tests were determined for the undisturbed samples representative of the subsurface material. These tests, supplemented by visual observation, ' comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material. ------------------------- ' The logs of the exploratory borings and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix. 1 ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States A06296261 Unified Soil Classification System xta��» rf,06 l,a nescn,ptton p'' a Clean GWq��+ �-VWed gavels and gravel-sand mixhuts, Iittle or i DO AM& Gravels GP :• 19radCd gr3vels and gravel-sand mixtures,little or 9no baies. ' �a V GrweLs GM Silty$ravels,gravel-Sand-silt mixu=. • a with Fines GC Clayey gravels,gravel-sand-clay rnistures. ZZ Clean SW Well-gra&d sands and gravelly sands,little or no d= � Sads - n : : : �x SP Poorly-tom sands and gravel san ly ds,little or no fines. ' g ,Sands l . o ,Y with SM Silty sands sand-silt mixtures Fines SC cry sands,sand-clay atixtures. HL c sibs,very fine sands,rock flour,silty or clayey cfine sands. a1 -4 'n CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,gravelly clays,sandy clays,silty clays,lean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty days oriow piasA iocity. a1 i Inorganic sills, mic aceow or diatomaceous fine sands or V o silts,chstic silts. A CH inorganic clays of high plasticity,rat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. ' -Noiy ft—ic Soils PT Peat,muck, and Wxr highly organic soils SOL Pl.-AS71CrTY CHART �� <3 60 ' 3-5 / Firm 6-10 •`� 9 x $0 Stiff � / o� 1 Wry Stiff 21 -40 zAO Hard >40 () 30 VCTY Loose <5 a // o� M n ott ' - 7 ML r GL Medium Dense 16-40 0 Denim 0 10 20 30 40 SO 60 70 80 90 100 110 ' Ntiy Dense >65 UQUID UMr1'e—u A. Boulders above 12 inches above 305 Cobbles 12 to 3 inches 3051v76.2 ' Gravel 3 inches to No.4 76.2 to 7.74 coarse(c) 3 to Y4 inches 76.2 to 19.1 fine M '/. 6 to No.4 19.1 to 4.76 Sand No.4 to No.200 4.76 to 0,074 ' coarse(c) No.4 to No. 10 4.76 to 2.00 atedium(m) No. 10 to No.40 2.00 to 0.042 fine(fl No.40 to No.200 0.042 to 0.074 t av below No, ow 0.074 DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-1 ' PROJECT: Proposed Renton Inn PROJECT NO.: 062-98261 CLIENT: Sue Tseng DATE: 11/17/98 ' LOCATION: 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North, Renton ELEVATION: DRILLER: LOGGED BY: R. Hyland DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 19.5' AT COMPLETION: 19.5' ' ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V E DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 94, pef DEPTH I N ' —7-0 �— .. ..........._.........._ ._................. 10 30 50 +I Very loose, fine to medium- 1/12 grained SILTY SAND ISM) with ' trace of GRAVEL; brown, moist, 1 drills easily I 5 ' 6112 6 i Loose below 5 feet 54/12 _. .......................... ' F,_•,• Very dense, coarse-grained 54 F .. GRAVELLY SAND (SP); grey, moist, drills firmly Medium dense, greyish brown below 10 feet 9/12 9 5D13 ........... ............ ......... ..... . • Very dense, coarse-grained 50 ' SANDY GRAVEL (GP); brown,20 I moist, drills firmly �--� ' Medium dense, coarse-grained SANDY (SP) with little GRAVEL; I == brown, saturated, drills zs moderately firmly � 34/12 .... _... . ..... I• •. ... ....... . Dense, fine-grained SILTY 34 ' J SAND (SM); grey, wet, drills firmly I I -r 30 i I (I! ' ! 44/12 44 4 I This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. ' Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: 13-1 ' PROJECT: Proposed Renton Inn PROJECT NO.: 062-98261 CLIENT: Sue Tseng DATE: 11/17/98 ' LOCATION: 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North, Renton ELEVATION: DRILLER: LOGGED BY: R. Hyland DRILL RIG: ' DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 19.5' AT COMPLETION: 19.5' ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V E DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N 10 30 so 35 ..................................... . . 31/12 Dense, fine-grained SAND IS Wl; 31 grey, wet, drills firm) 40 Bottom of Boring HLH4 I ' � 65 i i 51) I I T55 j 1 T I ' �60 T I ! 1 I I 1 65 i III l This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. ' Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-2 tPROJECT: Proposed Renton Inn PROJECT NO.: 062-98261 CLIENT: Sue Tseng DATE: 11/17/98 ' LOCATION: 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North, Renton ELEVATION: DRILLER: LOGGED BY: R. Hyland DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 19.5' AT COMPLETION: 19.5' ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V E DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N ' 0 10 30 50 ................................. ................ ASPHALTIC CONCRETE = 2 inches 3/12 3 ' Very loose, fine-grained SAND (SW) with little SILT; brown, moist, drills easily 5 12/12 Medium dense, fine- to medium- 12 grained SAND (SW) with trace of GRAVEL; brown, moist, drill 33/12 ..easily........... ' F _ Dense, coarse-grained GRAVELLY SAND (SP) ; 10 brownish grey, moist, drills j firmly 50/6 Very dense, coarse-grained 50 .l: SANDY GRAVEL (GW); brown, moist, drill firmly s:vd ' 4!*s50/6 i ' Very dense, coarse-grained 50 GRAVEL (GP) with trace of 20 — ,.'' SAND; greyish brown, moist, �' drills very firmly Wet below 22-1 r2 feet . 63/12 fi3 63 t T 225 Bottom of Boring 1T T ' -�-30 I i i t This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. ' Krazan and Associates s■ DRILL HOLE LOG ! BORING NO.: B-3 ' PROJECT: Proposed Renton Inn PROJECT NO.: 062-98261 CLIENT: Sue Tseng DATE: 11/17/98 LOCATION: 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North, Renton ELEVATION: ' DRILLER: LOGGED BY: R. Hyland DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 19.5' AT COMPLETION: 19.5' ' ELEVATION! WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V E DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pof DEPTH N ' 0 —N� 10 30 50 inches ITC CONCRETE = 2 inches t/tz 189.7 28.8 1 Very loose, fine-grained SILTY ' } SAND ISM) ; brown, moist, drill easily 5 3/12 ... ........ ' Very ioose, fine-grained SAND 230.fi 3.9 3 (SW) with trace of GRAVEL; brown, moist, drills easily 1t/t2 236.4 4.1 11 Loose below 7-1I2 feet ' +_10 Medium dense below 12-1/2 feet i T �23/12 � 242.5 11.6 23 is 60/12 __ _........ . . "•-' Very dense, coarse-grained 341.6 4.5 60 SANDY GRAVEL (GW); tan, z moist, drills firmly 9112 ia:>1r i Loose, fine- to medium-grained 284.6 35.1 9 t SILTY SAND (SM) with I j interbedded lenses of PEAT; 25 grey, saturated, drills easily I i ;I �- _bz/tz "Very' ...de... .... ...... ....... 562.1 10.6 62 I I 121 t Very nse, coarse-grained t ct'' GRAVEL (GW) with little SILT; +30 �•:2r grey, wet, drills very firmly ' 32/12 �ji+l'Itli Dense, fine-grained SILTY 344.9 21.9 32 I I t This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. ' Krazan and Associates 'I DRILL HOLE LOG 3 BORING NO.: B-3 PROJECT: Proposed Renton Inn PROJECT NO.: 062-98261 CLIENT: Sue Tseng DATE: 11/17/98 LOCATION: 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North, Renton ELEVATION: ' DRILLER: LOGGED BY: R. Hyland DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 19.5' AT COMPLETION: 19.5' ' ELEVATION! WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST C U R V E SAMPLERS Description Content Density DEPTH N DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf 10 30 50 SAND (SM) with trace of 35 GRAVEL and interbedded lenses of ORGANICS; grey, wet, drills firmly 49l12 Dense, fine-grained SAND (SW) 237.2 1 B.4 49 _ with trace of SILT; grey, wet, ' T drills firmly Too Bottom of Boring I 45 1 T+ I 50 1 T 55 1 i6O 1 65 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates ■ DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B-4 ' PROJECT: Proposed Renton Inn PROJECT NO.: 062-98261 CLIENT: Sue Tseng DATE: 11/17/98 LOCATION: 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North, Renton ELEVATION: ' DRILLER: LOGGED BY: R. Hyland DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: Water p PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, ry C U R V E SAMPLERS Description Content Density ity DEPTH N DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 10 30 50 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE = 2 inches IL18/12 144.8 34.9 8 T � :FILL - Loose, fine-grained SILTY SAND (SM): tan, moist, drills 5 easily............ v/12 ....I.. ..............._......... .. 217.5 25.1 9 T Loose, fine-grained SILTY SAND (SM); tan, moist, drills easily 17/12 247.1 23.5 17 ' T 10 Medium dense below 7-1/2 feet _ Bottom of Boring r —�-15 T 20 1 —;—ZS 30 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. ' Krazan and Associates .� DRILL HOLE LOG s BORING NO.: B-5 ' PROJECT: Proposed Renton Inn PROJECT NO.: 062-98261 CLIENT: Sue Tseng DATE: 11/17/98 LOCATION: 217-219 Sunset Boulevard North, Renton ELEVATION: ' DRILLER: LOGGED BY: R. Hyland DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: PENETRATION TEST ELEVATION! WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V E DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pef DEPTH N 10 30 50 T FILL- Medium dense, fine-to t5/1z medium-grained SAND (SW); brown, moist, drills easily 338.7 5.2 15 5 Very loose,' 2lt2 ..........................................._..... 296.3 16.7 2 fine-grained SILTY SAND (SM) ; brown, moist, drills easily ..................... 433.3 8.6 50 ,..... 50/5 Very dense, coarse rained 9 SAND (SP) with trace of GRAVEL and trace of SILT; 10 brownish grey, moist, drills very firmly ' Bottom of Boring ' l 15 I ' 1 I� t I -20 I i ■ i 25 t I 177 ' 30 T 1 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Sieve Analysis Report Y p ' = = R o 0 0 0 8 8 8 _ N J _ _ 3 2 100 1\ F 90 70 UJ 60 Z LL Z W U ' W 40 - -- - - -- -- - - ---- ------ -- — a. ' 20 10 - -... - - - - --- -- -- - - - ------ ------ --- ---- -- -- -- - ' 0 500 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE- mm %COBBLES %GRAVEL %SAND %FINES 1 CRS. I FINE CRS. MEDIUM FINE SILT I CLAY ' 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 7.0 1 42.1 i 50.2 SIEVE PERCENT j SPEC.` PASS? Soil Description SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO) Light gray brown silty sand. 1-1/2 in. 100.0 l in. 100.0 3/4 in. 100.0 1/2 in. 100.0 ' 3/8 in. 100.0 Atterberg Limits #4 100.0 PL= Non plastic LL= P1= #16 98.8 941 Coefficients � ' #50 87.5 D85= 0.271 D60= 0.121 D50= #200 60.s D30= D15= D10= CU- Cc= Classification USCS= ML AASHTO= A-4(0) Remarks None ' I F.M.=0.54 (no specification provided) Sample No.: 3801 Source of Sample: Native Date: I 1-24-98 Location: Bore 11-3-Sample#1 Elev./Depth: 18" ' Client: KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Project: Renton Inn Project No: 066-98261 Plate tAppendix B Page B.1 ' APPENDIX B EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL When the text of the report conflicts with the general specifications in this appendix, the recommendations in the ' report have precedence. SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork associated ' with the site rough grading, including but not limited to the furnishing of all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for receiving fill, excavation, processing, placement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to the lines and grades shown on the project ' grading plans,and disposal of excess materials. PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork to accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested by a representative of ' Krazan and Associates,Inc.,hereinafter known as the Soils Engineer and/or Testing Agency. Attainment of design grades when achieved shall be certified to by the project Civil Engineer. Both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If the Contractor should fail to meet the technical or design requirements ' embodied in this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the necessary readjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Soils Engineer, Civil Engineer or project tArchitect. No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Soils Engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Soils Engineer at least 2 working days prior to the commencement of any aspect of the site ' earthwork. The Contractor agrees that he shall assume soil and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the ' course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property;that this requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the ' performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the soil negligence of the Owner or the Engineers. ' TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be densified to a density not less that 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557-78, UBC, as specified in the technical portion of the Soil Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as determined by the Soils Engineer. The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications shall be the basis upon which ' satisfactory completion of work will be judged by the Soils Engineer. SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and to have ' familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the soil report. The Contractor shall make his own interpretation of the data contained in said report, and the Contractor shall not ' be relieved of liability under the contractor for any loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered during the progress of the work. ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States A06_o8.bl Appendix B Page B.2 DUST CONTROL: The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area, or off-site if caused by the Contractor's operation either during the performance of the earthwork or resulting from the conditions in which the Contractor leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including Courte costs of codefendants, for all claims related to dust or ' windblown materials attributable to his work. SITE PREPARATION Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and the preparations of foundation materials for receiving fill. ' CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition and shall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project, earthwork all structures, both surface and subsurface, trees, ' brush, roots, debris, organic matter, and all other matter determined by the Soils Engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site. Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth of 3 feet and to such a extent ' which would permit removal of all roots larger than 1 inch. Tree root removed in parking areas may be limited to the upper 1'/2 feet of the ground surface. Backfill or tree root excavation should not be permitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Soils Engineer is present for the proper control of backfill placement and ' compaction. Burning in areas which are to receive fill materials shall not be permitted. SUBGRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive Engineered Fill, building or slab loads shall be prepared as outlined above, scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and compacted to 95 percent relative compaction. ' Loose and/or areas of disturbed soils shall be moisture conditioned and compacted to 95 percent relative compaction. All ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by surface grading prior to placement of any fill material. All areas which are to receive fill materials shall be approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of any of the fill material. ' EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished to the tolerance normally defined by the Civil Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. All over excavation below the grades specified shall be backfilled at the Contractor's expense and shall be compacted in accordance with the applicable technical requirements. FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shall be moved or compacted without the presence of the ' Soils Engineer. Material from the required site excavation may be utilized for construction site fills provided prior approval is given by the Soils Engineer. All materials utilized for constructing site fills shall be free from vegetable or other deleterious matter as determined by the Soils Engineer. PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall not be permitted unless ' specifically approved by local code,as well as the Soils Engineer. ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States A06298261 ' Appendix B Page B.3 Both cut and fill shall be surface compacted to the satisfaction of the Soils Engineer prior to final acceptance. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be ' resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed fill are as specified. t ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States A06?98261 ' Appendix C Page C.1 ' APPENDIX C PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS 1. DEFINITIONS-The term "pavement" shall include asphalt concrete surfacing, untreated aggregate base, and ' aggregate subbase. The term "subgrade" is that portion of the area on which surfacing, base, or subbase is to be placed. ' 2. SCOPE OF WORK-This portion of the work shall include all labor, materials,tools and equipment necessary for and reasonable incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on the plans and as herein specified, except work specifically notes as"Work Not Included." ' 3. PREPARATION OF THE SUBGRADE - The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the various subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses to the lines, grades, and dimensions given on the plans. The upper 6 inches of the soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of ' 95 percent. The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of additional pavement courses. ' 4. UNTREATED AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate base course shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The base course material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. The material shall be spread in ' layers not exceeding 6 inches and each layer of base course shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 5. AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate subbase shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in ' conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The subbase material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. Each layer of subbase shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. ' 6. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACING - Asphaltic concrete surfacing shall consist of a mixture of mineral aggregate and paving grade asphalt, mixed at a central mixing plant and spread and compacted on a ' prepared base in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be AR-4000. The mineral aggregate shall be Type B, %2 inch maximum size, medium grading. The drying,proportioning,and mixing of the materials shall conform to State Specifications. 1 ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States A06298261 Appendix C Page C.2 The prime coat, spreading and compacting equipment, and spreading and compacting the mixture shall conform to State Specifications,with the exception that no surface course shall be placed when the atmospheric temperature is below 50 degrees F. The surfacing shall be rolled with a combination steel-wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in State Specifications. The surface course shall be placed with an approved self-propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine. 7. FOG SEAL COAT - The fog seal (mixing type asphaltic emulsion) shall conform to and be applied in ' accordance with the requirements of State Specifications. t ' Krazan&Associates,Inc. Ten Offices Serving The Western United States A06?98?til � � � � i � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �� , J N J .-,., f� .�' t� cd